Mensa isn′t even the most exclusive intellectual society. It′s actually one of the least exclusive. You only need to be in the top 2%, which means that out of the ~300 million people in the USA, about six million would qualify. Big whoop.

The Four Sigma Society, for instance, requires that you be a minimum of four standard deviations to the right of the mean. And they′re not the most exclusive either.

Mensa ― where you have to be smart enough to score reasonably high on an I.Q. test, yet stupid enough to plunk down annual dues for little more than what basically amounts to bragging rights.

Since this is England and another girl from the same estate joined mensa, I have to wonder if the cafeteria at their school fries everything in green oil that's safe to eat, but deadly to any of the cafeteria staff who touch it.

COMALite J:Mensa ― where you have to be smart enough to score reasonably high on an I.Q. test, yet stupid enough to plunk down annual dues for little more than what basically amounts to bragging rights.

THIS. Got in at 16. Stopped paying dues at 18. Never gone back in 25+ years.

PaLarkin:Since this is England and another girl from the same estate joined mensa, I have to wonder if the cafeteria at their school fries everything in green oil that's safe to eat, but deadly to any of the cafeteria staff who touch it.

PaLarkin:Since this is England and another girl from the same estate joined mensa, I have to wonder if the cafeteria at their school fries everything in green oil that's safe to eat, but deadly to any of the cafeteria staff who touch it.

I'd be willing to bet a good chunk of change that this is the last the world hears of her.

My brother outscored me on IQ testing when we were kids. I'm a doctor; he's a barista. He's still unbelievably brilliant, and I'm certain that he is smarter than me, but brilliance does not equal motivation.

clyph:COMALite J: Mensa ― where you have to be smart enough to score reasonably high on an I.Q. test, yet stupid enough to plunk down annual dues for little more than what basically amounts to bragging rights.

THIS. Got in at 16. Stopped paying dues at 18. Never gone back in 25+ years.

Never started. Seriously you have to pay to join a group to tell you that you are smrt? Doesn't sound very intelligent to me. *shrug*

clyph:COMALite J: Mensa ― where you have to be smart enough to score reasonably high on an I.Q. test, yet stupid enough to plunk down annual dues for little more than what basically amounts to bragging rights.

THIS. Got in at 16. Stopped paying dues at 18. Never gone back in 25+ years.

And all that tells me is that you were stupid enough to join.

It's almost as stupid as COMALite suggesting the exclusivity is somehow better.

GhostFish:My parents were throwing a big Christmas party one year, invited lots of people and friends of friends and so on.One guy showed up at the door and asked, "Is this the Mensa meeting?"My parents thought he was joking and played along.

Poor guy didn't realize he was at the wrong place until much, much later in the evening.

So I'm kind of left with my doubts about Mensa.

Well thank your lucky stars this guy didn't show up at your parent's door...

Zon:clyph: COMALite J: Mensa ― where you have to be smart enough to score reasonably high on an I.Q. test, yet stupid enough to plunk down annual dues for little more than what basically amounts to bragging rights.

THIS. Got in at 16. Stopped paying dues at 18. Never gone back in 25+ years.

And all that tells me is that you were stupid enough to join.

It's almost as stupid as COMALite suggesting the exclusivity is somehow better.

In terms of bragging rights (the main ‶benefit′′ of joining Mensa), it is. It′s kinda the point of bragging rights, in fact.

At 12 years of age I was still stamp collecting and haphazardly gluing model aeroplanes together. I was bookish and was considered one of the smart ones amongst my peers. Six years later when I reached university, I had dropped to being a solid B student, coasting along when I could. Things change. I hope this girl lives up to her potential, but it's not the worst thing in the world if she ends up focusing on other stuff.

FishyFred:IQ scores are skewed in the early years because, if I'm not mistaken, age is factored in.

Well, not in theory, at least. I wouldn't say so much that they're skewed as potentially less accurate.

Originally, IQ was supposed to be the ratio of a person's "mental age" to their "chronological age," so if Johnny was only 10 years old but could think and reason about as well as the average 14-year-old, he had an IQ score of 140 (14/10*100). But people quickly realized that that definition got very silly once a person reached adulthood. Would a twenty-year old who had the "mental age" of a 40-year-old have an IQ score of 200? And what does 'the "mental age" of a 40-year-old' even mean? We don't percieve the average 40-year-old to be "twice as smart as" the average 20-year-old the same way we perceive the average 14-year-old to be "twice as smart as" the average 7-year-old. Intelligence just doesn't progress that linearly.

So they gave up on "mental age" and redefined the IQ score as a measure of deviation from the mean intelligence, given the principle that intelligence is normally distributed (like a bell curve).

So a person with an IQ score of 115 is one standard deviation above the average for their age group, a person with a score of 130 is two standard deviations above. It is supposed to be adjusted for age group so that someone who has an IQ of 120 when they're 13 will still have an IQ of 120 when they're 33 (baring unforseen events such as brain damage, disease, injury, etc).

In theory, then, IQ scores are not skewed in the early years precisely because age is factored in. The system is designed such that, if everything works correctly and it's accurate and it's precise, your IQ is the same forever. But that only works because you're not so much measuring what the kids' IQ really is NOW so much as PREDICTING what it will be in adulthood, which adds another measure of uncertainty to the process.

(It's a little bit like issuing a speeding ticket based on a radar measurement of what your speed was 3 miles back and assuming that you didn't hit the brakes or stomp on the accelerator since then.)

I'm not sure that "skewed" is the right word for it, though, because that suggests a bias in one particular direction and I think it's more like imprecision.

FishyFred:IQ scores are skewed in the early years because, if I'm not mistaken, age is factored in.

Also, kids are smart. Adults find answers and put them together, but for solving new problems even scientists start to get sucky over time, and they have a system to follow.

Kids have nothing to go on but a tiny pool of experience, so their brains are REALLY good at dealing with new information and they can apply it outside of the normal ways as they don't even know what the normal ways are.

I can't help but notice that the math she is doing is really not that complicated.I've seen younger people do more interesting math. Her math is just integration. Anyone can do integration. I could teach a 6th grader integration. You really don't even need algebra.

Rockstone:I can't help but notice that the math she is doing is really not that complicated.I've seen younger people do more interesting math. Her math is just integration. Anyone can do integration. I could teach a 6th grader integration. You really don't even need algebra.

Actually, I just looked at that, it's summation, not integration... My point still stands.

Standardized testing flaws? Check. Freaks in Mensa who are just misfits looking to excuse their condition with some bullshiat about intelligence? Also check.

Only thing I can add is anecdotal: I had a crush on a woman with a Ph.D once, and whenever I would try to engage her in conversation about some subjects, it would immediately become a contest about how much more she knew about a certain subject than I did. Brain chemistry? Sure, she knew it. Linux? She had built farms of machines, ready for use! Various other geekish things? Oh yeah. And while I was blinded to her behavior at first, I slowly realized that she had some issues of her own. Namely, the inability to really deal with people as people. Everything was a competition she had to win first, and the sense of being recognized as perfect in anything she touched was of prime importance.

And I think that's what fuels organizations like Mensa as well: the sense of being the top of the field, utterly perfect, and without flaw. Americans love the idea of being better than everybody else to the point where it's a mental illness. It's odd that an organization--an entity dedicated to meeting people and interacting with them--is dedicated to the idea of being anti-people, anti-socializing, and so utterly and painfully dedicated to acting as proxy self-esteem. Dedication to a subject has its benefits, but at some point it was taken too far.

more like he found out that the rat race to make a lot of money is not worth it

Maybe, or maybe he found out that putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.

prjindigo:Sounds like one wanted to be Righteous, the other has fantasies about authority and you just said "I wanna be happy."

Nah, I really did try to be more, and am still trying. I test super high on abstract intelligence tests, but I bombed my SATs, and most other kinds of testing where the proctor is looking for a specific defined answer.

Inferring trends and patterns is a useful trait that the education system doesn't like to showcase, because you can't give someone a diploma for lateral thinking.

more like he found out that the rat race to make a lot of money is not worth it

Maybe, or maybe he found out that putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.

ciberido:FishyFred: IQ scores are skewed in the early years because, if I'm not mistaken, age is factored in.

Well, not in theory, at least. I wouldn't say so much that they're skewed as potentially less accurate.

Originally, IQ was supposed to be the ratio of a person's "mental age" to their "chronological age," so if Johnny was only 10 years old but could think and reason about as well as the average 14-year-old, he had an IQ score of 140 (14/10*100). But people quickly realized that that definition got very silly once a person reached adulthood. Would a twenty-year old who had the "mental age" of a 40-year-old have an IQ score of 200? And what does 'the "mental age" of a 40-year-old' even mean? We don't percieve the average 40-year-old to be "twice as smart as" the average 20-year-old the same way we perceive the average 14-year-old to be "twice as smart as" the average 7-year-old. Intelligence just doesn't progress that linearly.

So they gave up on "mental age" and redefined the IQ score as a measure of deviation from the mean intelligence, given the principle that intelligence is normally distributed (like a bell curve).

[upload.wikimedia.org image 325x163]

So a person with an IQ score of 115 is one standard deviation above the average for their age group, a person with a score of 130 is two standard deviations above. It is supposed to be adjusted for age group so that someone who has an IQ of 120 when they're 13 will still have an IQ of 120 when they're 33 (baring unforseen events such as brain damage, disease, injury, etc).

In theory, then, IQ scores are not skewed in the early years precisely because age is factored in. The system is designed such that, if everything works correctly and it's accurate and it's precise, your IQ is the same forever. But that only works because you're not so much measuring what the kids' IQ really is NOW so much as PREDICTING what it will be in adulthood, which adds another measure of uncertainty to the process.

(It's a little bit like issuing a speeding ticket based on a radar measurement of what your speed was 3 miles back and assuming that you didn't hit the brakes or stomp on the accelerator since then.)

I'm not sure that "skewed" is the right word for it, though, because that suggests a bias in one particular direction and I think it's more like imprecision.

This.

The imprecision comes from the fact that most of the verbal IQ score is based on basic knowledge questions. In a very literal sense, memorizing Trivial Pursuit answer cards can boost your IQ, but it probably isn't associated with a greater likelihood of success later in life.

more like he found out that the rat race to make a lot of money is not worth it

Maybe, or maybe he found out that putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.

more like he found out that the rat race to make a lot of money is not worth it

Maybe, or maybe he found out that putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.

You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

COMALite J:Mensa ― where you have to be smart enough to score reasonably high on an I.Q. test, yet stupid enough to plunk down annual dues for little more than what basically amounts to bragging rights.

Not really. My mother was a member of mensa and I was asked to join. I didn't, but I went to meetings with my mother a few times. Mensa meetings were just a place for people with high IQs to get together and set up rather mundane activities such as: bowling, barbecues, picnics, movies, and so forth with other folks who had high IQs. They weren't trying to solve the mysteries of the universe or what not, they were just trying to arrange activities with other people who they were more likely to be able to relate to both during and after the events.

Being a member often resulted in negative responses from others; i.e. friends, family members, co-workers, and supervisors. As such, even mentioning membership, outside of the group, was discouraged.

more like he found out that the rat race to make a lot of money is not worth it

Maybe, or maybe he found out that putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.

You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

Hey, why don't I just go eat some hay, make things out of clay, lay by the bay? I just may! What'd ya say?

LeafyGreens:<b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7367030/79841157#c79841157" target="_blank">jeremie</a>:</b> <i>jeremie: You mean like in his secret lair?

more like he found out that the rat race to make a lot of money is not worth it

Maybe, or maybe he found out that <b>putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work</b>, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.</i>

You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

Maybe he is working on a complex problem that can only be solved by mowing lawns.

Lionel Mandrake:Well, then. I look forward to reading her groundbreaking work in the coming years. Or not.

Exactly, give me a call when she does something that surpasses Einsteins or Hawkings contributions, Einstein in particular with general and special relativity stands as the greatest mind since Newton.Probably the highlight of her career will be: she develops a technique for extracting more money from the general public for a major corporation.

One of the many problems with IQ tests is that memory alone can score really high(which is probably a large part of the case here) but not really be all that functionally intelligent(we'll know in a few years if that's the case here).

My computer's hard drive has an excellent memory, and like some autistic people, isn't very functional when you tell it to tie its shoes or walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.

LeafyGreens:You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

As someone with a moderately high intelligence(I can walk and chew gum at the same time, heh, I'd say more but bragging about IQ on fark is pointless, especially after I slam the rating system), I'm a janitor(farking life choices, how do they work?) who works 8 hours a day at a school, and I'm probably more intelligent than the the lion's share of the teachers(granted it's k-8 where religion > science in some things(native american school), but still) and staff(especially the administration actually).

I may be the odd bird in that case, but really, most working folks would say the same, and most would also think they're smarter than the staff, never you mind that they never finished the 8th grade and that third digit in their IQ is non-existant.

Seriously though, you don't throw out your back from doing a job that requires intelligence, and you certainly don't break a leg during a complicated chess move if you're a functional and rational human being. (shouldn't be obscure on fark)

OK, so much for being serious.

Our education system is a bit of a joke, as is its standard measuring stick. Really, it's a sad reflection of society at large. Whatever some scheister can sway the populace to vote for is what we do, regardless of his intent or the actual repercussions. Schoolboards to our governing body.

Molavian:LeafyGreens: jeremie: jeremie: You mean like in his secret lair?

more like he found out that the rat race to make a lot of money is not worth it

Maybe, or maybe he found out that putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.

You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

Hey, why don't I just go eat some hay, make things out of clay, lay by the bay? I just may! What'd ya say?

The majority of successful business people are just average intelligence. Making money doesn't take brains, just work. The majority of intelligent people don't get satisfaction from making a lot of money. That's why you usually see them as researchers or scientists relying on grant money and professorships.

omeganuepsilon:One of the many problems with IQ tests is that memory alone can score really high(which is probably a large part of the case here) but not really be all that functionally intelligent(we'll know in a few years if that's the case here).

My computer's hard drive has an excellent memory, and like some autistic people, isn't very functional when you tell it to tie its shoes or walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.

LeafyGreens: You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

As someone with a moderately high intelligence(I can walk and chew gum at the same time, heh, I'd say more but bragging about IQ on fark is pointless, especially after I slam the rating system), I'm a janitor(farking life choices, how do they work?) who works 8 hours a day at a school, and I'm probably more intelligent than the the lion's share of the teachers(granted it's k-8 where religion > science in some things(native american school), but still) and staff(especially the administration actually).

I may be the odd bird in that case, but really, most working folks would say the same, and most would also think they're smarter than the staff, never you mind that they never finished the 8th grade and that third digit in their IQ is non-existant.

Seriously though, you don't throw out your back from doing a job that requires intelligence, and you certainly don't break a leg during a complicated chess move if you're a functional and rational human being. (shouldn't be obscure on fark)

OK, so much for being serious.

Our education system is a bit of a joke, as is its standard measuring stick. Really, it's a sad reflection of society at large. Whatever some scheister can sway the populace to vote for is what we do, regardless of his intent or the actual repercussions. Schoolboards to our governing body.

doglover:mr lawson: The best thing a parent can teach their kid is the scientific method.

It's really not.

Science is cool and all, but it's tediously boring and not at all the fastest or the best way to approach many things.

A far better piece of advice would be "Do what you love." Far better to be happy than anything else.

Still, our populace is so devoid of logic that it's now almost incapable of doing what it takes to be happy for a large amount of people. It's depressing when viewed on scale.

Teaching hard logic and doing what you love are not two things exclusive to eachother. Society and the individual would be better off with a good education and a dash of hippy plattitudes. If you don't raise them to be intelligent beings, you stave off their ultimate happiness because they will always have unrealistic goals and dreams because they don't know better. That basketweaving diploma will do them no good in life, no matter how much they thought it guaranteed they'd never be sewer workers and would have a nice desk job managing some company.

A less sarcastic look:

Trade skill jobs are important, but not fashionable. Everyone gets educated to do more fashionable things, many of those people end up on unemployment or worse, because they didn't have realistic expectations of what reality really is. An over abundance of people for X duty, and no one doing Y duty. Bad for society as a whole and for large numbers of individuals.

Thanks but no thanks, I'd rather educate and teach my child that it's good to be educated and to find a job that they like.

LeafyGreens:You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

The difference between those jobs is a physical job leaves your mind free to think and relax while the desk job is tons of stress that leaves your mind in a vegetable state. I came across a few very smart people who enjoyed physical jobs because they could go home and not be zombies after work.

Back in grade school, 4 out of about 40 of us scored over 140 and a few statisticians got upset and sent some experts in to retest us because they thought there had been some funny business. We all scored as well or better on the 2nd round. They never did tell us what we actually scored. Nuns didn't approve of people thinking they were special.

Mrs. Fister was a flight attendant for twenty years and was tested at 140 when she was 20. She is pretty farking smart but not a butt about it. She is retired now from being smart. I myself am not that bright.

more like he found out that the rat race to make a lot of money is not worth it

Maybe, or maybe he found out that putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.

You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

Why would you assume that? I spent years working as an Able Bodied Seaman (AB). Twelve hours a day, seven days a week for 120 days straight, followed by 120 off. Straight, mindless labor. Mostly "chipping and painting", removing rust with a chipping hammer and a needle gun.I went back to school, got my license, and now sail as a deck officer. Mostly it's boring and easy, but sometimes it gets crazy, and the consequences of a bad decision are pretty serious, sometimes life or death. Now mowing the three acres I hope to build a house on someday, and planting and trimming the trees on it is pretty blissful. Whether you use you body or your mind to make a living makes no difference to me, as long as you're productive. I just feel there is an abundance of able bodies, and a shortage of able minds. If you have an able mind, you should put it to work.

intelligent comment below:LeafyGreens: You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

The difference between those jobs is a physical job leaves your mind free to think and relax while the desk job is tons of stress that leaves your mind in a vegetable state. I came across a few very smart people who enjoyed physical jobs because they could go home and not be zombies after work.

That's because people shoot for the stars and get in over their heads, another effect of what I mentioned above. SO MANY applicants, the actually capable ones are hard to locate or simply not applying to that job.

3rotor:to those that think it's a blessing... you are obviously not "blessed" in this fashion.

to those that think, being well adjusted to a fundamentally sick society is healthy, you might need some more "blessing"....

ever wondered why so many "brainy" people seem to lack the ability to "make it" in the real world...

Instead of just "ability" I'd expand it to "ability, motivation, or desire"

(but you do kind of cover that with "make it")

Another factor that comes into play.Location (from ideal weather to proximity(distant or close) to family and friends).And a plethora of little things, hence my "life choices" statement above, little choices along the way have long lasting repercussions.For example. I don't make a ton of money per paycheck, but I have always been debt free and don't own an extravagant car or house. I've a brother who lives in Denver(I live in the middle of bumfark nowhere) and makes great money, but at the end of the month, I've got boatloads more money to play with, or save, or whatever.

Even if not for debt, cost of living in an area can make or break a guy.

omeganuepsilon:That's because people shoot for the stars and get in over their heads, another effect of what I mentioned above. SO MANY applicants, the actually capable ones are hard to locate or simply not applying to that job.

You are misunderstanding me. A desk job doesn't need to be "over your head" to be stressful. Most desk jobs these days are you doing the work of 2-4 people. The higher up you go the more your decisions affect others. You also have to manage people below you, and managing people who aren't that bright is stressful by itself. Most people are drama queens who resort to high school attitudes of cliques and gossip and all that nonsense.

I really don't see how she could possibly have qualified for Mensa. Sure, she's smart, but there's no way that 12-year-old girl can grow a neckbeard, and she's not even old enough to buy her own pipe tobacco. Are there other qualifications? I'm just going by what I've observed from people who have told me they're in Mensa.

omeganuepsilon:Thanks but no thanks, I'd rather educate and teach my child that it's good to be educated and to find a job that they like.

I'd rather teach my child to get out there and turn a profit doing what they love as opposed to trying to love what turns a profit.

Kind of like how Bald Bryan and Alison, clearly more intelligent in a bookish way, work for Adam Carola, a man who admits to picking up peanuts off an airport tarmac after a pigeon spit them out and eating them. But he's damn good at what he does and that's why he makes the big bucks. While they also do what they do well, but they don't entertain like Adam. He's a millionaire, they live in apartments. Entertainment pays more than sound effects and news stories. They've since started their own shows, but it's still not even close yet. Why? Adam like his talent more and he's liked it for a lot longer. He's the fastest wit in the west, despite not being the smartest.

doglover:omeganuepsilon: Thanks but no thanks, I'd rather educate and teach my child that it's good to be educated and to find a job that they like.

I'd rather teach my child to get out there and turn a profit doing what they love as opposed to trying to love what turns a profit.

Kind of like how Bald Bryan and Alison, clearly more intelligent in a bookish way, work for Adam Carola, a man who admits to picking up peanuts off an airport tarmac after a pigeon spit them out and eating them. But he's damn good at what he does and that's why he makes the big bucks. While they also do what they do well, but they don't entertain like Adam. He's a millionaire, they live in apartments. Entertainment pays more than sound effects and news stories. They've since started their own shows, but it's still not even close yet. Why? Adam like his talent more and he's liked it for a lot longer. He's the fastest wit in the west, despite not being the smartest.

It's not that Adam Carola is more talented. It's that more people appreciate his particular type of talent.

You can be the world's best X and for some values of X you'll be a billionaire while other values of X will make you nothing.

Jim_Callahan:Lionel Mandrake: Well, then. I look forward to reading her groundbreaking work in the coming years. Or not.

That. MENSA membership is more an indication that you're gullible enough for the "special club" scam than anything meaningful. At least IQ itself is trying to be meaningful (and just failing).

Admittedly I facepalm a lot less at the 12-year-old joining than usual, tweens are supposed to be obsessed with stupid clique bullshiat.

I hate to say it, but THIS.

I got into Mensa at age 14. I'm not even kidding, I'll take a picture of my old membership card if anyone calls me a liar. And yeah, that's why I joined, because I thought I was hot shiat and smarter than everyone and wanted to prove it to the world. I stopped paying my membership dues within two years because I went to a few meetings and read the letters section in the Mensa Bulletin and realized that just because you're really really good at taking certain kinds of tests mean you're a stable individual worth knowing. Honestly, the letters in the Mensa Bulletin were crazier than the letters to the editor in my small town's local newspaper.

You want to know what the Mensa test consisted of when I took it?

1. Straight analogies, ala the SAT.2. Picture analogies. Same thing as section 1, but with pictures instead of words.3. On the left side is a list of ammounts of money. On the right side is a list of numbers of coins (A. 2 quarters, 1 penny, 5 dimes, 3 nickels). You have to match them up as quickly as possible.4. We got read a story about the history of greek stagecraft and Dionysus, and had to answer questions about details we remembered from listening to the story.

IMO the true IQ test is realizing that Mensa is bullshiat once you're in it and deciding to not give them $50 a year for the "bragging right" of being a mensa member.

GhostFish:My parents were throwing a big Christmas party one year, invited lots of people and friends of friends and so on.One guy showed up at the door and asked, "Is this the Mensa meeting?"My parents thought he was joking and played along.

Poor guy didn't realize he was at the wrong place until much, much later in the evening.

So I'm kind of left with my doubts about Mensa.

Well, intelligence and social grace are two different things. If the guy was too afraid of sounding "stupid" by asking later on if he really WAS in the right place, he would have just sucked it up and played along. Remember, smart people are looked down upon in our society, so are already social outcasts. Do you think he REALLY wanted to make himself look even more the fool than he already did?

Is this where I get to both brag and bring about a measure of normality to the argument?

Okay:

I had an IQ (then in 1998, when I was 15) of 156

I *have* an IQ (now as of 2009) of 171.

I didn't get smarter, they just rewrote the definitions.

The only thing it's really made me aware of is that I know more than the gross majority of people when it comes to rational, down-to-earth things.

I can't fix a nuclear submarine, but I can tell you how it works. I can't do brain surgery, but I can tell you what part they're operating on based on what part of the brain they're focusing.

I have nothing more than pattern recognition and eidetic memory to thank for that, if I read something I will remember (even if it's a fleeting glance) 70-90% of it, compared to the "average" (always be dubious of this term when you hear it) of 35-45%.

What did I do with all of this knowledge, nascent ability and gifted-ness?

Not much. I woodwork, am employed at a pizza joint (for now) and play strategy games.

BUT; when it comes to cognitive ability - I will wipe the floor with a good nine-tenths of the people in the world.

HOWEVER; I work at a pizza joint.

TL;DR IQ is just a number. You can be smart as HELL, and still be nothing more than a contemporary to your contemporaries... but if you do what makes you happy; you are officially smarter than that same "90%". There are a number of literal honest-to-God geniuses in the world (as *I* call them) who have figured out how to do nothing but what they love... and are both more successful and happy than the guys who make three times as much.

Remember Office Space? At the end? When the smartest guy in the company realizes that doing dirty, sweaty construction is better than air-conditioned Hell? I'm that guy.

/XKCD's creator is a member, and he's openly said that some of their problems, unsolved since their creation, will NEVER be solved without computers and humans working together. There are story problems that span 100 pages... and have only one concrete answer. Concrete = When you hear the answer, you shiat bricks, smack yourself in the forehead and silently scream "STUPID. STUPID. STUPID." for five minutes. The devil is in the details, indeed.

Rockstone:Rockstone: I can't help but notice that the math she is doing is really not that complicated.I've seen younger people do more interesting math. Her math is just integration. Anyone can do integration. I could teach a 6th grader integration. You really don't even need algebra.

Actually, I just looked at that, it's summation, not integration...

Integration is summation.It's just a summation that happens to nicely cancel out most of the terms (a Riemann Sum) so that you can make an easy shortcut for calculating it.

And while the math she's standing next to isn't that terribly complex, you have to take into account1) It's probably just for the photo, and2) She's 12, and even most of the smart kids aren't doing anything with sigma notation in 6th grade. Infinite series are not trivial.

I say the same thing about MENSA that I say about every other exclusive club that recognizes people based on some special attribute.

You're not that special.

In this case: Hey we created a club for all the smart people.

And you're doing what with it? Sitting around talking about how smart you are? If you're going to get a bunch of smart people together then have them cooperate to figure out a problem. Otherwise it might as well just be a meeting at the local Moose Lodge.

intelligent comment below:LeafyGreens: You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

The difference between those jobs is a physical job leaves your mind free to think and relax while the desk job is tons of stress that leaves your mind in a vegetable state. I came across a few very smart people who enjoyed physical jobs because they could go home and not be zombies after work.

I'll add myself to that category; I've had some of my best thoughts about philosophy while acting in porn films.

GhostFish:My parents were throwing a big Christmas party one year, invited lots of people and friends of friends and so on.One guy showed up at the door and asked, "Is this the Mensa meeting?"My parents thought he was joking and played along.

Poor guy didn't realize he was at the wrong place until much, much later in the evening.

So I'm kind of left with my doubts about Mensa.

Excerpt:How I Joined Mensa

I started with the phone book. Looking up "mensa" was not going to be easy, what with having to follow the strict alphabetizing rules that are so common nowadays. I prefer a softer, more fuzzy alphabetizing scheme, one that allows the mind to float free and "happen" upon the word. There is pride in that. The dictionary is a perfect example of over-alphabetization, with its harsh rules and every little words neatly in place. It almost makes me never want to eat again.

Joining Mensa means that you are a genius, and enables you to meet other members who will understand what the hell you are talking about when you say, for example, "That lamppost is tawdry." That's the kind of person they're after. Joining Mensa instills in one a courtly benevolence toward nonmembers, who would pretend to know what you know, think what you think, and stultify what you perambulate.

I worried about the arbitrary 132 cut-off point, until I met someone with an I.Q. of 131 and, honestly, he was a bit slow on the uptake.

I gave up on the phone book, which led me astray time and again with its complex passages, and then tried blind calling with no success. Next, 1-800-MENSA, which weirdly brought dead silence on the other end of the phone. A week later while volksvalking, I realized that "Mensa" didn't contain enough numerals to be a phone number, and knew it must be understood that any future member would be able to figure out the next two digits in the sequence. I tried dialling MENSANE, MENSAIL, MENSAFE, and MENSAAB, but got three rebuffs and a fax tone.Link

MajorGroove:I'd be willing to bet a good chunk of change that this is the last the world hears of her.

I think that is the case with a lot of these young kids who are listed as geniuses, the same as the ones who graduate from Ivy League schools young etc.... Although just because we do not hear from them doesn't mean they aren't accomplishing something amazing.....it just means they aren't getting reality shows for having sex tapes or being fat rednecks. And if they went on a show like America Has Talent.....and showed some awesome invention, they'd get booed off the stage for someone who hits themselves in the nuts.

intelligent comment below:LeafyGreens: You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

The difference between those jobs is a physical job leaves your mind free to think and relax while the desk job is tons of stress that leaves your mind in a vegetable state. I came across a few very smart people who enjoyed physical jobs because they could go home and not be zombies after work.

Funny... I really enjoy the occasional return to the manual labour of my teen years for exactly that reason. It always seems to surprise people that I'm so willing to roll up my sleeves and sweat a bit.

Lots of people say they come up with solutions in their sleep, but I've done some of my best thinking while on a long drive or slugging boxes.

FishyFred:IQ scores are skewed in the early years because, if I'm not mistaken, age is factored in.

Age is factored in but this makes IQ levels in earlier years pronounced due to development of major cognitive functions in adolescence rather than being skewed as a score. Rather, the environment plays a dramatic role in development, and thus IQ scores in young children are less a reflection of potential and more of the environment. Scores are a little harder to get in children, and while several assessments should always be done this is especially true for children, but the score is not skewed.

What this means for the child is an entirely different discussion about the correlation between IQ and achievement, what form of intelligence is being assessed by those tests, and similar.

ciberido:FishyFred: IQ scores are skewed in the early years because, if I'm not mistaken, age is factored in.

Well, not in theory, at least. I wouldn't say so much that they're skewed as potentially less accurate.

If I might weigh in, I think "subject to change" is more to the point than either "skewed" or "less accurate".

The tested IQ of a 30 year old will probably not change much in the next 20 years of life. The tested IQ of a 12 year old could potentially go either up or down by a considerable margin in the next 10 years.

COMALite J:Mensa ― where you have to be smart enough to score reasonably high on an I.Q. test, yet stupid enough to plunk down annual dues for little more than what basically amounts to bragging rights.

As a former Mensa member and local chapter president, I must take issue with this statement...we didn't even get bragging rights.

Why is it that every IQ thread around here seems to touch a great many nerves? My mother was right--she never told me my IQ score. Said it wouldn't be good for my head. All these years later, I'm glad I don't know. No, I've never been tested since I was an adult.

more like he found out that the rat race to make a lot of money is not worth it

Maybe, or maybe he found out that putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.

You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

What's the ratio between jobs where critical thinking and problem solving are important and jobs that require a strong back? I don't know so I have to ask. Take a person who gets paid to hammer nails, dig holes or lift a heavy lourde and ask him/her to take up on a job which demands their mental faculties to be exercised repeatedly. That person might have to create answers to problems where no answer existed before. How would that person feel at the end of the day?

On the other hand, take a thinker and put him in place of the laborer. He will probably pray for death at the end of the work week, if not the end of the day. Could his body eventually become acclimated to the work and he be no different than the laborer?

Not to go on, but sitting behind a desk doesn't always require a smart person, if routines are already established one doesn't have to be creative. In case of event A, you execute plan B. That's the mental equivalent of a fry cook.

Kind of weird that the Daily Fail chooses two scientists who, although they were certainly very bright, and brighter than most, were examples of extreme application of their intelligence versus innate ability.

Isn't there that guy with a 206 IQ that works for NASA and nobody bothers to remember his name because he hasn't done anything standout yet?

I can't help but wonder if being a member of the mensa's problem solving club helped her score in the same way sat review courses help with that test. Perhaps she is just really smart and prepared for that specific test, and not a super genius along the lines of Einstein and hawking. And if she is that smart, she is now burdened by enormous expectations. If she "just" becomes a doctor or lawyer, she will be regarded as underachieving

Pumpernickel bread:I can't help but wonder if being a member of the mensa's problem solving club helped her score in the same way sat review courses help with that test. Perhaps she is just really smart and prepared for that specific test, and not a super genius along the lines of Einstein and hawking. And if she is that smart, she is now burdened by enormous expectations. If she "just" becomes a doctor or lawyer, she will be regarded as underachieving

If you read TFA, I'd be more suspicious of eidetic memory. She memorizes her part for a play within 24 hrs.

COMALite J:Mensa isn′t even the most exclusive intellectual society. It′s actually one of the least exclusive. You only need to be in the top 2%, which means that out of the ~300 million people in the USA, about six million would qualify. Big whoop.

The Four Sigma Society, for instance, requires that you be a minimum of four standard deviations to the right of the mean. And they′re not the most exclusive either.

Mensa ― where you have to be smart enough to score reasonably high on an I.Q. test, yet stupid enough to plunk down annual dues for little more than what basically amounts to bragging rights.

If she is so smart why is she carrying that huge stack of books, and not having some guy do it for her, in fact what the hell is she doing with books anyway in the information age not smart enough to get a kindle?

intelligent comment below:omeganuepsilon: That's because people shoot for the stars and get in over their heads, another effect of what I mentioned above. SO MANY applicants, the actually capable ones are hard to locate or simply not applying to that job.

You are misunderstanding me. A desk job doesn't need to be "over your head" to be stressful. Most desk jobs these days are you doing the work of 2-4 people. The higher up you go the more your decisions affect others. You also have to manage people below you, and managing people who aren't that bright is stressful by itself. Most people are drama queens who resort to high school attitudes of cliques and gossip and all that nonsense.

No, I am not.

For just about every person fed up with their job's problems, there is some one else out there who could do it well, and easily, AND enjoy life outside of work, not be this brain dazzled zombie that you try to pretend is the absolute rule of the universe for that job.

Besides, your example is more about people skills from the vague sound of it(of which you apparently have none if you so intimately know this "problem), rather than intelligence(of which you apparently have a shortage of as well since you cannot follow a quite simple conversation and think you are "misunderstood").

cryinoutloud:Why is it that every IQ thread around here seems to touch a great many nerves? My mother was right--she never told me my IQ score. Said it wouldn't be good for my head. All these years later, I'm glad I don't know. No, I've never been tested since I was an adult.

/Not going to tell my son what his is either.

It's a method of telling some people they are innately 'better' than other people. It SHOULD rile people up. Considering it seems to have no real world evidence, it also needs to be ridiculed.

Raiden333:Jim_Callahan: Lionel Mandrake: Well, then. I look forward to reading her groundbreaking work in the coming years. Or not.

That. MENSA membership is more an indication that you're gullible enough for the "special club" scam than anything meaningful. At least IQ itself is trying to be meaningful (and just failing).

Admittedly I facepalm a lot less at the 12-year-old joining than usual, tweens are supposed to be obsessed with stupid clique bullshiat.

I hate to say it, but THIS.

I got into Mensa at age 14. I'm not even kidding, I'll take a picture of my old membership card if anyone calls me a liar. And yeah, that's why I joined, because I thought I was hot shiat and smarter than everyone and wanted to prove it to the world. I stopped paying my membership dues within two years because I went to a few meetings and read the letters section in the Mensa Bulletin and realized that just because you're really really good at taking certain kinds of tests mean you're a stable individual worth knowing. Honestly, the letters in the Mensa Bulletin were crazier than the letters to the editor in my small town's local newspaper.

You want to know what the Mensa test consisted of when I took it?

1. Straight analogies, ala the SAT.2. Picture analogies. Same thing as section 1, but with pictures instead of words.3. On the left side is a list of ammounts of money. On the right side is a list of numbers of coins (A. 2 quarters, 1 penny, 5 dimes, 3 nickels). You have to match them up as quickly as possible.4. We got read a story about the history of greek stagecraft and Dionysus, and had to answer questions about details we remembered from listening to the story.

IMO the true IQ test is realizing that Mensa is bullshiat once you're in it and deciding to not give them $50 a year for the "bragging right" of being a mensa member.

starsrift:Kind of weird that the Daily Fail chooses two scientists who, although they were certainly very bright, and brighter than most, were examples of extreme application of their intelligence versus innate ability.

Isn't there that guy with a 206 IQ that works for NASA and nobody bothers to remember his name because he hasn't done anything standout yet?

I was given an IQ test when I was 12. I scored 164. Since then I've done everything I could do to kill those brain cells. I'm now an atheist, alcoholic dope-smoker with homicidal tendencies and a penchant for young Asian girls dressed up like cats and a deep-seated fear of mimes.

If I had started out with an IQ of 103, I wouldn't be the awesome guy I am today. Ladies, I'm available... and my Mom has a big guest room we could move into. It's bigger than the room I'm in now. Must like ferrets.

Teacher and club organiser Stacey Meighen joked: 'We have given her extra work to do and will now want to know why she's not getting As in everything.'

F*ck you. The girl does not need extra work but differentiated work which increases complexity, depth, or pace of material. Further, low scores, lack of completion on assignments, etc., are common amongst gifted students because the material is not appropriate to them and is therefore boring and worthless. What this tells me is she is kept on grade level work with the assumption she will flourish as a result of generating an identity of achievement which is counter to what we know about gifted social and emotional development.

Being a Mensa club organizer means you should know something about this. Being a teacher means you should know something about this. Why don't you?

Hawnkee:Typical farking freeloader dregs of society. Always some monkey trying to leech off of her abilities. I hope she can get away from there as soon as possible.

This is probably pressed a little by the teacher, too. Teachers frequently exploit the abilities of students in teaching or reteaching concepts to other students rather than enriching or extending or otherwise accelerating the content.

Aquapope:a penchant for young Asian girls dressed up like cats and a deep-seated fear of mimes.

jeremie:Our local MENSA guy mows lawns for a living. Having a great a great mind means nothing if you're not smart enough to harness it.

True.

However, having a great mind sometimes means figuring out what makes you happy and setting yourself up to be able to do it.

Some people find yard work (especially if you have a ride on mower) to be very relaxing and enjoyable. He might be one of those folks and now gets paid to do it. As a bonus, he's even a productive member of society.

It's a win-win.

/had an older janitor in high school who graduated when he was 15 (back in the day)//he was a janitor because he enjoyed interacting with the kids, not because he needed the money.

hitlersbrain:It's a method of telling some people they are innately 'better' than other people. It SHOULD rile people up. Considering it seems to have no real world evidence, it also needs to be ridiculed.

Then why even discuss it? See, that's what I love--everyone making fun of how we score "intelligence"--but lording it over others if they happen to do well on the test and making sure to mention the number at the same time they're ranting about how it means nothing. Because someone scored higher than THEY did.

Vangor:Aquapope: a penchant for young Asian girls dressed up like cats and a deep-seated fear of mimes.

How to dress up in a fear of mimes?

Curled up in a fuzzy cat-ball, ignoring the invisible wall and the non-existent wind, of course.Yeah, I needed a comma or I needed to reorganize that sentence. But still, mimes suck and Asian cat-girls are kinda cute.

Vangor:Better, the new term for a group of mimes is "fear"; similar to how one has a "pride of lions" or "murder of crows", this would be a "fear of mimes".

"Fear of mimes" I like it. But I think I'd like better the crow collective. A murder of crows. A murder of mimes. Even if the mimes aren't murdered, it sounds calming and good. If the mimes are murdered, well then, we all win!

COMALite J:Mensa isn′t even the most exclusive intellectual society. It′s actually one of the least exclusive. You only need to be in the top 2%, which means that out of the ~300 million people in the USA, about six million would qualify. Big whoop.

The Four Sigma Society, for instance, requires that you be a minimum of four standard deviations to the right of the mean. And they′re not the most exclusive either.

Mensa ― where you have to be smart enough to score reasonably high on an I.Q. test, yet stupid enough to plunk down annual dues for little more than what basically amounts to bragging rights.

MajorGroove:I'd be willing to bet a good chunk of change that this is the last the world hears of her.

My brother outscored me on IQ testing when we were kids. I'm a doctor; he's a barista. He's still unbelievably brilliant, and I'm certain that he is smarter than me, but brilliance does not equal motivation.

Or the kid wanting to do anything that would lead to brilliance. This girl might want to be a novelist, or firefighter, or something else that, well, isn't math. And then everyone will complain about wasted talent.

cryinoutloud:hitlersbrain: It's a method of telling some people they are innately 'better' than other people. It SHOULD rile people up. Considering it seems to have no real world evidence, it also needs to be ridiculed.

Then why even discuss it? See, that's what I love--everyone making fun of how we score "intelligence"--but lording it over others if they happen to do well on the test and making sure to mention the number at the same time they're ranting about how it means nothing. Because someone scored higher than THEY did.

Mocking a flawed method of finding guessing at intelligence(IQ) is not devaluing actual intelligence or the benefit to society an accurate measure of ability would be.

Discussing why the IQ measurement is bunk is key to finding a better way. A lot of people in this thread specifically don't mention their own score, or do so in passing ( an instance of why it's ridiculous).

LouDobbsAwaaaay:omeganuepsilon: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Any particular reason for the animosity toward this girl? She doesn't come off as a biatch.

Welcome to Fark!

Yeah, I guess. I get the comedic value of the intentionally-overly-sexist jokes, but a lot of people actually seem like they're upset about this.

Again, welcome to fark.

People like that are why I never clicked the politics tab, and now they're spreading and occupying every thread, including minor drivel like this(the article, not the girl, because really "look here's a smart kid" is not a news story).

More and more random every day whackos are finding that they can speak their mind on the internet, to include fark, with impunity. I can see the allure, the anonymity granting all kinds of things. I use it to be a snarky asshole, but many others use it to display their, well, bigotry and obsession. That anonymity grants the poster a certain credit, in that he's now an equal, one individual voice, no longer needing the approval of the masses to speak out.

Places like fark are more and more short lived as a gathering place for more intellectual discourse.

jeremie: Maybe, or maybe he found out that putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.

LeafyGreens:You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

I used to work full time loading and unloading trucks. Doesn't get much more physical than that. It wasn't wonderful, but it wasn't hell, either. Biggest advantage, perhaps, was that you could let your body fall into a kind of groove and your mind could roam pretty freely. Sometimes I miss it.

Just because you prefer things one way doesn't mean that everybody does, nor does someone liking something you don't necessarily mean that they don't know it as well as you do. That's presumptuous, and while it's common enough on Fark, it doesn't do either of you any good.

ThrobblefootSpectre:If I might weigh in, I think "subject to change" is more to the point than either "skewed" or "less accurate".

The tested IQ of a 30 year old will probably not change much in the next 20 years of life. The tested IQ of a 12 year old could potentially go either up or down by a considerable margin in the next 10 years.

Well, it's something a lot of people disagree about. There's a "nature versus nurture" debate there, where some people claim (and can come up with some studies that back them up) that a person's IQ score measures something innate, largely genetic, that is set by age 6 (or earlier!) and will not change much over time. But there are also quite a number of people in the "nurture" camp who argue that a 12-year-old's intelligence is not yet set in stone and there's still plenty of opportunity to either stunt it or enhance it. And they, too, have studies to back them up.

The general scientific consensus, meanwhile, SEEMs to be that the truth lies somewhere in the middle and that both "nature" and "nurture" play significant roles. But it's not yet a decided question.

To get to a more specific example of the IQ score of a person at 12 versus that same person's IQ score at age 30, you do see some variation. But the question is, are the different scores different because the person's intelligence ACTUALLY changed, or is the difference in scores mostly due to inaccuracy (or imprecision or bias) in the childhood tests? Or, for that matter, what about inaccuracy or imprecision or bias in the adult tests? Both sides of the arguments can point to the same studies and same facts and claim that they bolster their argument.

It's also complicated by the fact that bigots will use the position that intelligence is mostly innate (and probably genetic) to defend racism. The entire position, whatever scientific validity it may have, is tainted by that association. There's a book by Stephen J. Gould called "The Mismeasure of Man" that's worth reading if you're interested -- though take it with a grain of salt if you do read it, as I personally think Gould takes some liberties with the facts to make his arguments seem more convincing that they really are.

Pumpernickel bread: I can't help but wonder if being a member of the mensa's problem solving club helped her score in the same way sat review courses help with that test. Perhaps she is just really smart and prepared for that specific test, and not a super genius along the lines of Einstein and hawking. And if she is that smart, she is now burdened by enormous expectations. If she "just" becomes a doctor or lawyer, she will be regarded as underachieving

starsrift:If you read TFA, I'd be more suspicious of eidetic memory. She memorizes her part for a play within 24 hrs.

Eidetic memory always screws up IQ test results.

Probably not, for two main reasons. First because eidetic memory, in the sense that I think you mean, is largely a myth. People who can flip through a book and then recite the entire thing from first word to last do not actually exist.

Second, because there are IQ tests written such that fantastic memory would not be of great help. If you think someone's reported IQ score was skewed because of something like a cultural bias, language barrier, or eidetic memory, then you give them a test that factors that element out, and you compare scores. If the second score is substantially different from the first score, then you were right, and the person had a significant advantage or disadvantage that skewed the test. If the two scores are virtually identical, then there was probably never any significant advantage or disadvantage.

ciberido:jeremie: Maybe, or maybe he found out that putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work, at least in the short term. Also you don't have to chase a dollar to put your mind to work. I bet you could think of a few occupations which benefit from high intelligence yet garner low pay.

LeafyGreens: You've never done physical labor for 8 hours a day, have you? I would much rather sit in my office that think through things than have to say, bail hay all day.

I used to work full time loading and unloading trucks. Doesn't get much more physical than that. It wasn't wonderful, but it wasn't hell, either. Biggest advantage, perhaps, was that you could let your body fall into a kind of groove and your mind could roam pretty freely. Sometimes I miss it.

Just because you prefer things one way doesn't mean that everybody does, nor does someone liking something you don't necessarily mean that they don't know it as well as you do. That's presumptuous, and while it's common enough on Fark, it doesn't do either of you any good.

Personal taste aside. Thought is not difficult and does not usually yield pain. Stress above an accustomed level, maybe, but even at that it's not worse than putting strain on the physical body above what it's conditioned to.

It's the absolute of absolutes present in that original post that makes it contemptible. Plenty of smarter people not only find thought easy, but enjoyable. Plenty of working men find a manual labor job enjoyable as well.

Each sort of job has it's ups and downs, and a certain amount of either sort of effort is going to be detrimental to the person doing the work. Physical detriments though, certainly tend to be more permanent and are easy to achieve, full on mental fracture from stress is not all that common.

omeganuepsilon:It's the absolute of absolutes present in that original post that makes it contemptible. Plenty of smarter people not only find thought easy, but enjoyable. Plenty of working men find a manual labor job enjoyable as well.

I guess I'm one of the few people who read "putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work" completely differently. I assume we're talking about the difference between manual labor and academic work. In which case, breaking into academia requires four years of college, another 3-5 years of graduate school, novel research, a dissertation, and an oral exam. Working in manual labor requires being old enough to be allowed to work in manual labor (specialized training notwithstanding). The amount of time, money, and effort you have to front-load for a brain-job is huge compared to a brawn-job. That's what I figured he was getting at; the more intelligent sibling may have looked at all the bullshiat you have to go through in order to work in academia and decided "fark all of that", and went to work in something that pays the bills and doesn't require you to devote the next decade toward getting your foot in the door.

Jim_Callahan:Not been to school or had a kid there in a while, eh? Iirc basic series notation is somewhere in the grade school/Jr. High level nowadays.

Well I'm a recent college graduate but yeah, it has been quite a while since I was in grade school. I didn't learn sigma notation until I took Calculus in college. I suppose it could be introduced early in algebra, but none of my classes did so. Not that I'd be against such a thing -- I do think they should introduce more complex mathematical concepts earlier.

trappedspirit:COMALite J: Mensa isn′t even the most exclusive intellectual society. It′s actually one of the least exclusive. You only need to be in the top 2%, which means that out of the ~300 million people in the USA, about six million would qualify. Big whoop.

The Four Sigma Society, for instance, requires that you be a minimum of four standard deviations to the right of the mean. And they′re not the most exclusive either.

Mensa ― where you have to be smart enough to score reasonably high on an I.Q. test, yet stupid enough to plunk down annual dues for little more than what basically amounts to bragging rights.

omeganuepsilon:LouDobbsAwaaaay: omeganuepsilon: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Any particular reason for the animosity toward this girl? She doesn't come off as a biatch.

Welcome to Fark!

Yeah, I guess. I get the comedic value of the intentionally-overly-sexist jokes, but a lot of people actually seem like they're upset about this.

Again, welcome to fark.

People like that are why I never clicked the politics tab, and now they're spreading and occupying every thread, including minor drivel like this(the article, not the girl, because really "look here's a smart kid" is not a news story).

More and more random every day whackos are finding that they can speak their mind on the internet, to include fark, with impunity. I can see the allure, the anonymity granting all kinds of things. I use it to be a snarky asshole, but many others use it to display their, well, bigotry and obsession. That anonymity grants the poster a certain credit, in that he's now an equal, one individual voice, no longer needing the approval of the masses to speak out.

Places like fark are more and more short lived as a gathering place for more intellectual discourse.

I never suspected that fark was a place for serious intellectual discourse...it happens by accident on occasion, and that's good.

I always figured it was a place to throw snark around and enjoy weird jokes.

Now, granted that snark and those jokes aren't funny when someone is just trying to find a way to show the world that they are bigoted morons who figured out how to work a series of tubes.

For just about every person fed up with their job's problems, there is some one else out there who could do it well, and easily, AND enjoy life outside of work, not be this brain dazzled zombie that you try to pretend is the absolute rule of the universe for that job.

Besides, your example is more about people skills from the vague sound of it(of which you apparently have none if you so intimately know this "problem), rather than intelligence(of which you apparently have a shortage of as well since you cannot follow a quite simple conversation and think you are "misunderstood").

You're boring and overanalyzing, putting words in my mouth, all because you're desperate to come across as "smarter"

if you honestly believe that if you are stressed with your job then you just aren't smart enough, as you have claimed, then you have no real job experience in the first place.

"people skills" has nothing to do with it. Managing people is stressful by itself, regardless of how good your people skills are. That's strike 3 with you, I'm done feeding a blatant troll.

omeganuepsilon:More and more random every day whackos are finding that they can speak their mind on the internet, to include fark, with impunity. I can see the allure, the anonymity granting all kinds of things. I use it to be a snarky asshole, but many others use it to display their, well, bigotry and obsession. That anonymity grants the poster a certain credit, in that he's now an equal, one individual voice, no longer needing the approval of the masses to speak out.

LouDobbsAwaaaay:omeganuepsilon: It's the absolute of absolutes present in that original post that makes it contemptible. Plenty of smarter people not only find thought easy, but enjoyable. Plenty of working men find a manual labor job enjoyable as well.

I guess I'm one of the few people who read "putting your mind to work is a lot harder than putting your body to work" completely differently. I assume we're talking about the difference between manual labor and academic work. In which case, breaking into academia requires four years of college, another 3-5 years of graduate school, novel research, a dissertation, and an oral exam. Working in manual labor requires being old enough to be allowed to work in manual labor (specialized training notwithstanding). The amount of time, money, and effort you have to front-load for a brain-job is huge compared to a brawn-job. That's what I figured he was getting at; the more intelligent sibling may have looked at all the bullshiat you have to go through in order to work in academia and decided "fark all of that", and went to work in something that pays the bills and doesn't require you to devote the next decade toward getting your foot in the door.

You're oversimplifying one side down to "manual labor" and the other requiring a very specific education.

There are entry level jobs in both vague fields. Yeah, you can dig ditches, to start, and you can also be some secretary or errand boy.

Both brawn and brain jobs have higher paying jobs though, and they both require fair educations + experience(though sometimes in largely different ratios). Relegating either to "harder" and implying the other easier, as an absolute, is preposterous. Sure, education is a preload, but often there is not necessarily as much OJT as required in a typical trade skill where it can take years or even decades to build up qualifications to operate specific equipment.

Most trade skill jobs that require physical fitness are not so much ditch digging jobs, but skilled professionals in their own right. You can't just walk in to a vast majority of those jobs at any given level and perform if you're physically fit, any more than those guys could simply be a lawyer one day if they had a high enough IQ.

The ditch digger sort of unskilled manual labor is actually a fairly small part of non-intellectual career paths, and typically filled with people that do it because they have no other options. Similarly, so is the part of being a professional substitute or temp secretary.

It's almost as if people, even in this supposedly intellectual thread, actually think "those jobs" are lesser non important things. Sound like a bunch of spoiled narcissistic prigs. As a hypothetical, let's let all "those" jobs suddenly vanish overnight. Power plants shut down, sewers back up, buildings fall into filth and disrepair, etc. Butchers, farmers, truck drivers gone....zero food coming into the cities. That's where the bear shiats in the buckwheat, so to speak. It would be a very rapid decline into a sort of dystopia.

Yes, you are. You actually believe anyone who is stressed at work is just not that smart.

This is your reply for "stressed out desk job"

omeganuepsilon:That's because people shoot for the stars and get in over their heads, another effect of what I mentioned above. SO MANY applicants, the actually capable ones are hard to locate or simply not applying to that job.

I know the patterns, so rather than read ALL the comments, here's what people are saying above:

> "Mensans are elitist arrogant dummies. They brag about being in Mensa and pay the dues, but they're really not that smart and they're awkward." "yeah, I qualified and joined as a tiny kid and didn't find it rewarding."

Heard it.

Our culture vilifies intelligence. The jock gets the girl and the geek gets tolerated only if he or she is useful in some way. People who use polysyllabic words or read books are weird in a bad way, as are people who spend time thinking or working on puzzles.

I've known several dozen Mensans, but I didn't know they were Mensans until years had passed. They were just, to my mind, ordinary people who were interested in more than the stupidest of TV shows (though often they liked those too) and other aggressively normal stuff.

I joined a little over a year ago, on a whim. I can afford it. Nobody knows I've joined except the people I meet when I go to one of the outings. Those people are considerate and friendly, and I've never seen or dealt with 'penis-measuring contests' like I have to deal with sometimes among the aggressively normal. I also don't get insulted or ostracized for using words like 'ostracize.'

Mensa wants to be many things, including a proto-thinktank for people to brainstorm the solutions to some of the world's problems. This hasn't really happened, but it's occasionally a successful social club. That's just fine.

The Mensa haters? I believe they spawn in one of two ways:

1) They met a teenage Mensan who was exceptionally annoying.

2) They're extremely insecure.

(The top 2% is not particularly exclusive and isn't meant to be. What's nice is not having to deal with the vocal, angry, and occasionally charismatic bottom 20% occasionally.)

Mock26:aearra: 162 is brainier than Einstein and Hawkings? Interesting. My son is higher IQ than that and my daughter is higher than my son (by 20 points). Strange they aren't interested in mensa.

Probably because you have not yet told them that you made up their IQ scores.

They probably heard about the membership fee, and were smart enough to say "screw that; I can make my own friends without paying some elitists $63/year to let me into their club."

At least, that's why I didn't join Mensa. That, and bragging about IQ is pointless. Smart actions matter, while smart potential is just unused potential. I don't want to pay to be a member of a group of people who don't realize that.

dannysauer:Mock26: aearra: 162 is brainier than Einstein and Hawkings? Interesting. My son is higher IQ than that and my daughter is higher than my son (by 20 points). Strange they aren't interested in mensa.

Probably because you have not yet told them that you made up their IQ scores.

They probably heard about the membership fee, and were smart enough to say "screw that; I can make my own friends without paying some elitists $63/year to let me into their club."

At least, that's why I didn't join Mensa. That, and bragging about IQ is pointless. Smart actions matter, while smart potential is just unused potential. I don't want to pay to be a member of a group of people who don't realize that.

Besides, all an IQ test really does is tell how good you are at taking an IQ test.

The problem with people with an incredibly high intelligence is that they know how smart they are. It is difficult to engage in a stimulating conversation with a simpleton so they are often a lonely lot of folks. Then they start to feel bad, because they know it isn't the person's fault that they aren't as smart and cannot keep up with the latest science talk. They'll usually dumb themselves down, but even that can take its toll eventually. This is all just my experience, tho. Others may be different. Sometimes it's great to talk about stuff like television and movies. Plus if you have one or two high IQ friends it works out well.